Development and validation of a recursive partitioning analysis-based pretreatment decision-making tool identifying ideal candidates for spine stereotactic body radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: This study was aimed at developing and validating a decision-making tool predictive of overall survival (OS) for patients receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spinal metastases. METHODS: Three hundred sixty-one patients at one institution were used for the training set, and 182 at a second institution were used for external validation. Treatments most commonly involved one or three fractions of spine SBRT. Exclusion criteria included proton therapy and benign histologies. RESULTS: The final model consisted of the following variables and scores: Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) ≥ 6 (1), time from primary diagnosis < 21 months (1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status = 1 (1) or ECOG performance status > 1 (2), and >1 organ system involved (1). Each variable was an independent predictor of OS (p < .001), and each 1-point increase in the score was associated with a hazard ratio of 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.79-2.25; p < .0001). The concordance value was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.78). The scores were discretized into three groups-favorable (score = 0-1), intermediate (score = 2), and poor survival (score = 3-5)-with 2-year OS rates of 84% (95% CI, 79%-90%), 46% (95% CI, 36%-59%), and 21% (95% CI, 14%-32%), respectively (p < .0001 for each). In the external validation set (182 patients), the score was also predictive of OS (p < .0001). Increasing SINS was predictive of decreased OS as a continuous variable (p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: This novel score is proposed as a decision-making tool to help to optimize patient selection for spine SBRT. SINS may be an independent predictor of OS.

Cost effectiveness of treatment strategies for high risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) have multiple accepted treatment options. Because there is no overall survival benefit of one option over another, appropriate treatment must consider patient life expectancy, quality of life, and cost. METHODS: The authors compared quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost effectiveness among treatment options for HRPC using a Markov model with three treatment arms: (1) external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) delivered with 20 fractions, (2) EBRT with 23 fractions followed by low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy boost, or (3) radical prostatectomy alone. An exploratory analysis considered a simultaneous integrated boost according to the FLAME trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01168479). RESULTS: Treatment strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). EBRT with LDR brachytherapy boost was a cost-effective strategy (ICER, $20,929 per QALY gained). These results were most sensitive to variations in the biochemical failure rate. However, the results still demonstrated cost effectiveness for the brachytherapy boost paradigm, regardless of any tested parameter ranges. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that EBRT with LDR brachytherapy was favored in 52% of 100,000 Monte Carlo iterations. In an exploratory analysis, EBRT with a simultaneous integrated boost was also a cost-effective strategy, resulting in an ICER of $62,607 per QALY gained; however, it was not cost effective compared with EBRT plus LDR brachytherapy boost. CONCLUSIONS: EBRT with LDR brachytherapy boost may be a cost-effective treatment strategy compared with EBRT alone and radical prostatectomy for HRPC, demonstrating high-value care. The current analysis suggests that a reduction in biochemical failure alone can result in cost-effective care, despite no change in overall survival.

Association between Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are the most commonly prescribed antihypertensives, with prior studies identifying a possible association between long-term use and increased rates of lung cancer. This study evaluated this potential association in a large population using propensity matching. METHODS: This was a population-based cohort study in a large healthcare system in three regions of the United States. Pairwise propensity score matching was performed using demographics and comorbidities. All of the adult patients in the healthcare system from January 1, 2000 to April 30, 2018 with at least 1 year of follow-up were included. RESULTS: In total, 3,253,811 patients with a median age of 59 (range 18-103) years were included. The ACEI group had a higher freedom from lung cancer versus controls at 15 years (98.47%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 98.41-98.54) versus 98.26%, (95% CI 98.20-98.33), whereas ARBs had similar rates versus controls at all time points. For patients diagnosed as having lung cancer, median all-cause survival was significantly higher in the ACEI (34.7 months, 95% CI 32.8-36.6) and ARB (30.9 months, 95% CI 28.1-33.8) groups than the control group (20.6 months, 95% CI 20.1-21.1). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed lower rates of lung cancer with ACEI use and no difference in risk with ARBs. In addition, use of these medications was found to be associated with increased survival in those diagnosed as having lung cancer. This study supports the continued use of these medications without concern for increasing the risk of lung cancer.

Integration of Telemedicine Consultation Into a Tertiary Radiation Oncology Department: Predictors of Use, Treatment Yield, and Effects on Patient Population.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic led to rapid expansion of telemedicine. The implications of telemedicine have not been rigorously studied in radiation oncology, a procedural specialty. This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of in-person patients (IPPs) and virtual patients (VPs) who presented to a large cancer center before and during the pandemic and to understand variables affecting likelihood of receiving radiotherapy (yield) at our institution. METHODS: A total of 17,915 patients presenting for new consultation between 2019 and 2021 were included, stratified by prepandemic and pandemic periods starting March 24, 2020. Telemedicine visits included video and telephone calls. Area deprivation indices (ADIs) were also compared. RESULTS: The overall population was 56% male and 93% White with mean age of 63 years. During the pandemic, VPs accounted for 21% of visits, were on average younger than their in-person (IP) counterparts (63.3 years IP v 62.4 VP), and lived further away from clinic (215 miles IP v 402 VP). Among treated VPs, living closer to clinic was associated with higher yield (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; P < .001). This was also seen among IPPs who received treatment (OR, 0.96; P < .001); however, the average distance from clinic was significantly lower for IPPs than VPs (205 miles IP v 349 VP). Specialized radiotherapy (proton and brachytherapy) was used more in VPs. IPPs had higher ADI than VPs. Among VPs, those treated had higher ADI (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patient characteristics and yield were significantly different between IPPs and VPs. Telemedicine increased reach to patients further away from clinic, including from rural or health care-deprived areas, allowing access to specialized radiation oncology care. Telemedicine has the potential to increase the reach of other technical and procedural specialties.

Dosimetric Features of Ultra-Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

Purpose: To report clinical and dosimetric characteristics of 5-fraction stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) using intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for localized prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: All patients receiving IMPT SABR from 2017 to 2021 for localized prostate cancer at our institution were included. Five fractions were delivered every other day to the prostate +/- seminal vesicles [clinical target volume (CTV)] with 3 mm/3% robustness. A 4-field arrangement with 2 anterior oblique and 2 opposed lateral beams was used in most patients (97%), and most (99%) had a retroprostatic hydrogel spacer. Results: A total of 534 patients with low (14%), favorable intermediate (45%), unfavorable intermediate (36%), high (4.0%), or very high-risk (0.6%) disease are evaluated. Prescription dose was 36.25 Gy (31%), 38 Gy (38%), or 40 Gy (31%) was prescribed. Median volume percentage of CTV receiving at least 100% of prescription dose [V100% (%)] was 100% [interquartile range: 99.99-100]. Rectum V50% (%), V80% (%), and V90% (%) were significantly lower in patients who had spacer, with a mean difference of -9.70%, -6.59%, and -4.42%, respectively, compared to those who did not have spacer. Femoral head dose was lower with a 4-field arrangement. Mean differences in left and right femoral head V40% (%) were -6.99% and -10.74%, respectively. Conclusion: We provide a large, novel report of patients treated with IMPT SABR for localized prostate cancer. Four-field IMPT with hydrogel spacer provides significant sparing of rectum and femoral heads without compromising target coverage.

Accuracy of a Cancer Registry Versus Clinical Care Team Chart Abstraction in Identifying Cancer Recurrence.

Objective: To evaluate the completeness and reliability of recurrence data from an institutional cancer registry for patients with head and neck cancer. Patients and Methods: Recurrence information was collected by radiation oncology and otolaryngology researchers. This was compared with the institutional cancer registry for continuous patients treated with radiation therapy for head and neck cancer at a tertiary cancer center. The sensitivity and specificity of institutional cancer registry data was calculated using manual review as the gold standard. False negative recurrences were compared to true positive recurrences to assess for differences in patient characteristics. Results: A total of 1338 patients who were treated from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2017, were included in a cancer registry and underwent review. Of them, 375 (30%) had confirmed cancer recurrences, 45 (3%) had concern for recurrence without radiologic or pathologic confirmation, and 31 (2%) had persistent disease. Most confirmed recurrences were distant (37%) or distant plus locoregional (29%), whereas few were local (11%), regional (9%), or locoregional (14%) alone. The cancer registry accuracy was 89.4%, sensitivity 61%, and specificity 99%. Time to recurrence was associated with registry accuracy. True positives had recurrences at a median of 414 days vs 1007 days for false negatives. Conclusion: Currently, institutional cancer registry recurrence data lacks the required accuracy for implementation into studies without manual confirmation. Longer follow-up of cancer status will likely improve sensitivity. No identified differences in patients accounted for differences in sensitivity. New, ideally automated, data abstraction tools are needed to improve detection of cancer recurrences and minimize manual chart review.

Proton versus photon craniospinal irradiation for adult medulloblastoma: A dosimetric, toxicity, and exploratory cost analysis.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether proton craniospinal irradiation (CSI) decreased the dose to normal tissue and resulted in less toxicity than photon CSI for adult patients. Methods: This single-institution retrospective analyzed differences in radiation doses, acute toxicity, and cost between proton and CSI for adult medulloblastoma patients. Results: Of 39 total patients, 20 were treated with photon CSI prior to 2015, and 19 were treated with proton CSI thereafter. Median age was 28 years (range 18-66). The molecular subtype was most commonly sonic hedgehog (68%). Patients most commonly received 36 Gy CSI in 20 fractions with a boost to 54-55.8 Gy (92%). Proton CSI delivered significantly lower mean doses to cochleae, lacrimal glands, lens, parotid glands, pharyngeal constrictors, esophagus, lungs, liver, and skin (all P < .001). Patients receiving proton CSI had significantly lower rates of acute dysphagia of any grade (5% versus 35%, P = .044) and decreased median weight loss during radiation (+1.0 versus -2.8 kg, P = .011). Weight loss was associated with acute hospitalization (P = .009). Median follow-up was 2.9 and 12.9 years for proton and photon patients, respectively, limiting late toxicity and outcome comparisons. At the last follow-up, 5 photon patients had died (2 of progressive disease, 3 without recurrence ages 41-63) and 21% had experienced major cardiovascular events. At 10 years, 89% were alive and 82% were recurrence free. Conclusions: This study demonstrates dosimetric improvements with proton CSI, potentially leading to decreased acute toxicity including dysphagia and weight loss during treatment.

Assessment of minimum target dose as a predictor of local failure after spine SBRT.

OBJECTIVES: Metastasis-directed stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has demonstrated robust clinical benefits in carefully selected patients, improving local control and even overall survival (OS). We assess a large database to determine clinical and dosimetric predictors of local failure after spine SBRT. METHODS: Spine SBRT treatments with imaging follow-up were identified. Patients were treated with a simultaneous integrated boost technique using 1 or 3 fractions, delivering 20-24 Gy in 1 fraction to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and 16 Gy to the low dose volume (or 27-36 Gy and 21-24 Gy for 3 fraction treatments). Exclusions included: lack of imaging follow-up, proton therapy, and benign primary histologies. RESULTS: 522 eligible spine SBRT treatments (68 % single fraction) were identified in 377 unique patients. Patients had a median OS of 43.7 months (95 % confidence interval: 34.3-54.4). The cumulative incidence of local failure was 10.5 % (7.4-13.4) at 1 year and 16.3 % (12.6-19.9) at 2 years. Local control was maximized at 15.3 Gy minimum dose for single-fraction treatment (HR = 0.31, 95 % CI: 0.17 - 0.56, p < 0.0001) and confirmed via multivariable analyses. Cumulative incidence of local failure was 6.1 % (2.6-9.4) vs. 14.2 % (8.3-19.8) at 1 year using this cut-off, with comparable findings for minimum 14 Gy. Additionally, epidural and soft tissue involvement were predictive of local failure (HR = 1.77 and 2.30). CONCLUSIONS: Spine SBRT offers favorable local control; however, minimum dose to the GTV has a strong association with local control. Achieving GTV minimum dose of 14-15.3 Gy with single fraction SBRT is recommended whenever possible.

Assessment of bladder filling during prostate cancer radiation therapy with ultrasound and cone-beam CT.

Prostate cancer patients undergoing external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) benefit from a full bladder to decrease bowel and bladder toxicity. Ultrasound may offer a proxy metric for evaluation, sparing CBCT dosing. Patients were prospectively enrolled pre-simulation from January 2017 to February 2018. Bladder volume was evaluated prior to RT using US daily and CBCT for three daily treatments and then weekly unless otherwise indicated. 29 patients completed median 40 days of RT, resulting in 478 CBCT and 1,099 US bladder volumes. 21 patients were treated to intact glands and 8 to the post-prostatectomy bed. Median patient age was 70 years. Bladder volume on CBCT and US positively correlated (r = 0.85), with average bladder volume for all patients of 162 mL versus 149 mL, respectively. Bladder volume during treatment was consistently lower than the volume at CT simulation (153 mL vs 194 mL, p<0.01) and progressively declined during treatment. Patients older than 70 years presented with lower average bladder volumes than those < 70 years (122 mL vs 208 mL, respectively, p<0.01). Patients with the highest agreement between CBCT and US (<10% variability) had higher average bladder volumes (192 mL vs 120 mL, p=0.01). US was found to be an accurate measure of bladder volume and may be used to monitor daily bladder volumes in patients being treated with radiation for prostate cancer.

Comparing Oncologic Outcomes and Toxicity for Combined Modality Therapy vs. Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Previously Irradiated Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

No standard treatment paradigm exists for previously irradiated locally recurrent rectal cancer (PILRRC). Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) may improve oncologic outcomes and reduce toxicity compared with combined modality therapy (CMT). Eighty-five patients treated at Institution A with CIRT alone (70.4 Gy/16 fx) and eighty-six at Institution B with CMT (30 Gy/15 fx chemoradiation, resection, intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT)) between 2006 and 2019 were retrospectively compared. Overall survival (OS), pelvic re-recurrence (PR), distant metastasis (DM), or any disease progression (DP) were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier model, with outcomes compared using the Cox proportional hazards model. Acute and late toxicities were compared, as was the 2-year cost. The median time to follow-up or death was 6.5 years. Median OS in the CIRT and CMT cohorts were 4.5 and 2.6 years, respectively (p ≤ 0.01). No difference was seen in the cumulative incidence of PR (p = 0.17), DM (p = 0.39), or DP (p = 0.19). Lower acute grade ≥ 2 skin and GI/GU toxicity and lower late grade ≥ 2 GU toxicities were associated with CIRT. Higher 2-year cumulative costs were associated with CMT. Oncologic outcomes were similar for patients treated with CIRT or CMT, although patient morbidity and cost were lower with CIRT, and CIRT was associated with longer OS. Prospective comparative studies are needed.

Postmastectomy Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy: 5-Year Oncologic and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To report oncologic, physician-assessed, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for a group of women homogeneously treated with modern, skin-sparing multifield optimized pencil-beam scanning proton (intensity modulated proton therapy [IMPT]) postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed consecutive patients who received unilateral, curative-intent, conventionally fractionated IMPT PMRT between 2015 and 2019. Strict constraints were applied to limit the dose to the skin and other organs at risk. Five-year oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated as part of a prospective registry at baseline, completion of PMRT, and 3 and 12 months after PMRT. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients were included. One hundred nine (86%) received chemotherapy, among whom 82 (65%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 4.1 years. Five-year locoregional control was 98.4% (95% CI, 93.6-99.6), and overall survival was 87.9% (95% CI, 78.7-96.5). Acute grade 2 and 3 dermatitis was seen in 45% and 4% of patients, respectively. Three patients (2%) experienced acute grade 3 infection, all of whom had breast reconstruction. Three late grade 3 adverse events occurred: morphea (n = 1), infection (n = 1), and seroma (n = 1). There were no cardiac or pulmonary adverse events. Among the 73 patients at risk for PMRT-associated reconstruction complications, 7 (10%) experienced reconstruction failure. Ninety-five patients (75%) enrolled in the prospective PRO registry. The only metrics to increase by >1 point were skin color (mean change: 5) and itchiness (2) at treatment completion and tightness/pulling/stretching (2) and skin color (2) at 12 months. There was no significant change in the following PROs: bleeding/leaking fluid, blistering, telangiectasia, lifting, arm extension, or bending/straightening the arm. CONCLUSIONS: With strict dose constraints to skin and organs at risk, postmastectomy IMPT was associated with excellent oncologic outcomes and PROs. Rates of skin, chest wall, and reconstruction complications compared favorably to previous proton and photon series. Postmastectomy IMPT warrants further investigation in a multi-institutional setting with careful attention to planning techniques.

Dosimetric Analysis of Axillary Lymph Node Coverage Using High Tangents in the Prone Position for Left-Sided Breast Cancers.

AIM/OBJECTIVE: Prone positioning is often used to reduce the dose to organs at risk during adjuvant breast irradiation. High tangents are used with supine treatments in patients with the low-volume nodal disease to increase nodal coverage while minimizing toxicities. Our study aims to evaluate nodal coverage for patients treated in the prone position with high tangents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study analyzed the plans for 20 patients with early-stage, left-sided breast cancers treated at our institution from 2018 to 2019. All patients were treated in the prone position. Axillary nodal levels I-III were contoured, and treatment plans were generated using high tangents. The heart, bilateral lungs, and breast tissue were retrospectively contoured. All plans were evaluated to a dose of 42.4 Gy in 16 fractions. RESULTS: Level I lymph node levels had a mean coverage of 99% of the prescription dose (range: 98-100%). Similarly, level II coverage was approximately 88% (range: 65-100%). The mean coverage for level III was approximately 25% (range: 0-52%). The mean heart dose, mean lung volume receiving ≥20 Gy (V20) for the bilateral lungs, and ipsilateral V20 were 1.69 Gy, 1.64%, and 3.56%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Treating patients in the prone position with high tangents provides excellent coverage of axillary levels I and II, although there is minimal coverage of axillary level III. Prospective trials are needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes when treating patients with high tangents in the prone position.

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies for Spinal Metastases.

PURPOSE: We analyzed the cost-effectiveness of standard palliative external beam radiation (EBRT, 8 Gy in 1 fraction), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT, 24 Gy in 2 fractions), and radiofrequency ablation for painful spinal metastases. Single-fraction SBRT (delivering 24 Gy) was also assessed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Markov state transition model was constructed. Key model parameters were derived from prospective clinical trial data. Strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with effectiveness in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. Costs included both hospital and professional costs using 2020 Medicare reimbursement. RESULTS: The base case demonstrated that 2-fraction SBRT was not cost-effective compared with single-fraction EBRT, with an ICER of $194,145 per QALY gained. Radiofrequency ablation was a more costly and less effective strategy in this model. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that EBRT was favored in 66% of model iterations. If median survival were improved after SBRT, 2-fraction SBRT became cost-effective, with ICERs of $80,394, $57,062, and $47,038 for 3-, 6-, and 9-month improvements in survival, respectively. Because 2-fraction SBRT data reported that 18% of patients had an indeterminant pain response at 3 months and 2-fraction SBRT is infrequently used in clinical practice, single-fraction SBRT data were also assessed. Single-fraction SBRT delivering 24 Gy was cost-effective compared with single-fraction EBRT, with an ICER of $92,833 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: For appropriately chosen patients, single-fraction SBRT was more cost-effective than conventional EBRT or radiofrequency ablation. Conventional EBRT remains a cost-effective treatment for patients with poor expected survival.

Development and Assessment of a Predictive Score for Vertebral Compression Fracture After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Spinal Metastases.

IMPORTANCE: Vertebral compression fracture (VCF) is a potential adverse effect following treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spinal metastases. OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess a risk stratification model for VCF after SBRT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study conducted at a high-volume referral center included 331 patients who had undergone 464 spine SBRT treatments from December 2007 through October 2019. Data analysis was conducted from November 1, 2020, to August 17, 2021. Exclusions included proton therapy, prior surgical intervention, vertebroplasty, or missing data. EXPOSURES: One and 3 fraction spine SBRT treatments were most commonly delivered. Single-fraction treatments generally involved prescribed doses of 16 to 24 Gy (median, 20 Gy; range, 16-30 Gy) to gross disease compared with multifraction treatment that delivered a median of 30 Gy (range, 21-50 Gy). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The VCF and radiography components of the spinal instability neoplastic score were determined by a radiologist. Recursive partitioning analysis was conducted using separate training (70%), internal validation (15%), and test (15%) sets. The log-rank test was the criterion for node splitting. RESULTS: Of the 331 participants, 88 were women (27%), and the mean (IQR) age was 63 (59-72) years. With a median follow-up of 21 months (IQR, 11-39 months), we identified 84 VCFs (18%), including 65 (77%) de novo and 19 (23%) progressive fractures. There was a median of 9 months (IQR, 3-21 months) to developing a VCF. From 15 candidate variables, 6 were identified using the backward selection method, feature importance testing, and a correlation heatmap. Four were selected via recursive partitioning analysis: epidural tumor extension, lumbar location, gross tumor volume of more than 10 cc, and a spinal instability neoplastic score of more than 6. One point was assigned to each variable, and the resulting multivariable Cox model had a concordance of 0.760. The hazard ratio per 1-point increase for VCF was 1.93 (95% CI, 1.62-2.30; P < .001). The cumulative incidence of VCF at 2 years (with death as a competing risk) was 6.7% (95% CI, 4.2%-10.7%) for low-risk (score, 0-1; 273 [58.3%]), 17.0% (95% CI, 10.8%-26.7%) for intermediate-risk (score, 2; 99 [21.3%]), and 35.4% (95% CI, 26.7%-46.9%) for high-risk cases (score, 3-4; 92 [19.8%]) (P < .001). Similar results were observed for freedom from VCF using stratification. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this cohort study identify a subgroup of patients with high risk for VCF following treatment with SBRT who may potentially benefit from undergoing prophylactic spinal stabilization or vertebroplasty.

Single and Multifraction Spine Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and the Risk of Radiation Induced Myelopathy.

Purpose: This study reports on the risk of radiation-induced myelitis (RM) of the spinal cord from a large single-institutional experience with 1 to 5 fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to the spine. Methods and Materials: A retrospective review of patients who received spine SBRT to a radiation naïve level at or above the conus medullaris between 2007 and 2019 was performed. Local failure determination was based on SPIne response assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria. RM was defined as neurologic symptoms consistent with the segment of cord irradiated in the absence of neoplastic disease recurrence and graded by Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Rates of adverse events were estimated and dose-volume statistics from delivered treatment plans were extracted for the planning target volumes and spinal cord. Results: A total of 353 lesions in 277 patients were identified that met the specified criteria, for which 270, 70, and 13 lesions received 1-, 3-, and 5-fraction treatments, respectively, with a median follow-up of 46 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 41-52 months) for all surviving patients. The median overall survival was 33.0 months (95% CI, 29-43). The median D0.03cc to the spinal cord was 11.7 Gy (interquartile range [IQR], 10.5-12.4), 16.7 Gy (IQR, 12.8-20.6), and 26.0 Gy (IQR, 24.1-28.1), for 1-, 3-, 5-fractions. Using an a/b = 2Gy for the spinal cord, the median single-fraction equivalent-dose (SFED2) was 11.7 Gy (IQR, 10.2-12.5 Gy) and the normalized biological equivalent dose (nBED2/2) was 19.9 Gy (IQR, 15.4-22.8 Gy). One patient experienced grade 2 RM after a single-fraction treatment. The cumulative probability of RM was 0.3% (95% CI, 0%-2%). Conclusions: Spine SBRT is safe while limiting the spinal cord (as defined on treatment planning magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography myelogram) D0.03cc to less than 14 Gy, 21.9 Gy, and 30 Gy, for 1, 3, and 5-fractions, consistent with standard guidelines.

Boron Neutron Capture Therapy: A Review of Clinical Applications.

Boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) is an emerging treatment modality aimed at improving the therapeutic ratio for traditionally difficult to treat tumors. BNCT utilizes boronated agents to preferentially deliver boron-10 to tumors, which, after undergoing irradiation with neutrons, yields litihium-7 and an alpha particle. The alpha particle has a short range, therefore preferentially affecting tumor tissues while sparing more distal normal tissues. To date, BNCT has been studied clinically in a variety of disease sites, including glioblastoma multiforme, meningioma, head and neck cancers, lung cancers, breast cancers, hepatocellular carcinoma, sarcomas, cutaneous malignancies, extramammary Paget's disease, recurrent cancers, pediatric cancers, and metastatic disease. We aim to provide an up-to-date and comprehensive review of the studies of each of these disease sites, as well as a review on the challenges facing adoption of BNCT.

Costs of Definitive Chemoradiation, Surgery, and Adjuvant Radiation Versus De-Escalated Adjuvant Radiation per MC1273 in HPV+ Cancer of the Oropharynx.

PURPOSE: De-escalated treatment for human papillomavirus (HPV)+ oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has shown promising initial results. Health-care policy is increasingly focusing on high-value care. This analysis compares the cost of care for HPV+ OPSCC treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT), surgery and adjuvant radiation (RT), and surgery and de-escalated CRT on MC1273. METHODS AND MATERIALS: MC1273 is a prospective, phase 2 study evaluating adjuvant CRT to 30 to 36 Gy plus docetaxel for HPV+ OPSCC after surgery for high-risk patients. Matched standard-of-care control groups were retrospectively identified for patients treated with definitive CRT or adjuvant RT. Standardized costs were evaluated before radiation, during treatment (during RT), and at short-term (6 month) and long-term (7-24 month) follow-up periods. RESULTS: A total of 56 definitive CRT, 101 adjuvant RT, and 66 MC1273 patients were included. The CRT arm had more T3-4 disease (63% vs 17-21%) and higher N2c-N3 disease (52% vs 20-24%) vs both other groups. The total treatment costs in the CRT, adjuvant RT, and MC1273 groups were $47,763 (standard deviation [SD], $19,060], $57,845 (SD, $17,480), and $46,007 (SD, $9019), respectively, and the chemotherapy and/or RT costs were $39,936 (SD, $18,480), $26,603 (SD, $12,542), and $17,864 (SD, $3288), respectively. The per-patient, per-month, average short-term follow-up costs were $3860 (SD, $10,525), $1072 (SD, $996), and $972 (SD, $833), respectively, and the long-term costs were $978 (SD, $2294), $485 (SD, $1156), and $653 (SD, $1107), respectively. After adjustment for age, T-stage, and N-stage, treatment costs remained lower for CRT and MC1273 versus adjuvant RT ($45,450 and $47,114 vs $58,590, respectively; P < .001), whereas the total per-patient, per-month follow-up costs were lower in the MC1273 study group and adjuvant RT versus CRT ($853 and $866 vs $2030, respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: MC1273 resulted in 10% and 20% reductions in global costs compared with standard-of-care adjuvant RT and definitive CRT treatments. Substantial cost savings may be an added benefit to the already noted low toxicity and maintained quality of life of treatment per MC1273.

Current use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer: A National Cancer Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated both safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as monotherapy in the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. Our study aims to provide an update analyzing the use of SBRT compared with conventional and hypofractionated regimens in the United States from 2004 to 2015. METHODS: This retrospective review was conducted using the National Cancer Database. We identified 114,931 patients with sufficient diagnostic and treatment information treated with definitive radiation therapy in the United States from 2004 to 2015. The relative utilization of conventional fractionation (defined as 180-200 cGy per fraction and >5 fractions), moderate hypofractionation (defined as >200 cGy per fraction and >5 fractions), and SBRT (defined as >200 cGy per fraction and 5 fractions or less) were compared over the same time period. Logistic regression models were used to estimate trends. Demographic factors were collected and analyzed using chi-squared tests and independent t-tests. RESULTS: The proportion of prostate cancer patients receiving SBRT increased substantially from 0.9% in 2004 to 19.5% in 2015. Moderate hypofractionation exhibited some growth, increasing from 2.7% of patients to 4.7% in 2015. Conventional fractionation use declined significantly from 96.3% in 2004 to 75.8% in 2015. Notably, there was a sharp decline in the absolute number of patients receiving conventional fractionation in 2011, from 14,699 patients treated in 2009 to 1492 in 2011. Patients treated with SBRT were more likely to be treated in academic centers, younger, and have higher income than other fractionation groups. The most frequently used fractionation schedule was 3625 cGy in five fractions. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SBRT for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer has increased significantly from 2004 to 2015, coinciding with recently published data supporting the efficacy and favorable toxicity profile of this technique.

Proton beam therapy utilization in adults with primary brain tumors in the United States.

The utilization of proton beam therapy (PBT) as the primary treatment of adults with primary brain tumors (APBT) was evaluated through query of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between the years 2004 and 2015. International Classification of Diseases for Oncology code for each patient was stratified into six histology categories; high-grade gliomas, medulloblastomas, ependymomas, other gliomas, other malignant tumors, or other benign intracranial tumors. Demographics of the treatment population were also analyzed. A total of 1,296 patients received PBT during the 11-year interval for treatment of their primary brain tumor. High-grade glioma, medulloblastoma, ependymoma, other glioma, other malignant, and other benign intracranial histologies made up 39%, 20%, 13%, 12%, 13%, and 2% of the cohort, respectively. The number of patients treated per year increased from 34 to 300 in years 2004 to 2015. Histologies treated with PBT varied over the 11-year interval with high-grade gliomas comprising 75% and 45% at years 2004 and 2015, respectively. The majority of the patient population was 18-29 years of age (59%), Caucasian race (73%), had median reported income of over $63,000 (46%), were privately insured (68%), and were treated at an academic institution (70%). This study characterizes trends of malignant and benign APBT histologies treated with PBT. Our data from 2004 through 2015 illustrates a marked increase in the utilization of PBT in the treatment of APBT and shows variability in the tumor histology treated over this time.

Improving identification of candidates for lung cancer screening in a high risk population.

BACKGROUND: Low dose computerized tomography (LDCT) has been shown to reduce lung cancer specific mortality by 20 %. Despite U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) endorsement, screening of appropriate patients in the U.S. remains low, at 1.9 %. The goal of this study was to assess the number and type of patients that would qualify for lung cancer screening based upon recommendations by various guidelines. METHODS: We prospectively collected a patient reported questionnaire, including smoking history, family history, exposure history, and demographics, from April-October 2017 from new consults in the Department of Radiation Oncology and Otolaryngology (ORL). Patients smoking status and patient factors were collected and reported. Patients qualifying for screening by USPSTF, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and Tammemagi scoring criteria were identified. Multivariate analysis assessed the factors associated with positive criteria for screening and the sensitivity of each criterion was calculated. RESULTS: There were 546 new consults during the study period and 528 successfully completed the questionnaire. A total of 104/528 (20 %) patients who completed questionnaires qualified for screening based on any guideline. After exclusion of active lung cancer (n = 19), poor prognosis (n = 24), and CT as part of surveillance (n = 16), 45 (8.5 %) patients would require LDCT. Of the entire population, 10 %, 11 % and 18 % of patients qualified based on USPSTF, NCCN, and Tammemagi, which was reduced to 4.9 %, 5.3 %, and 7.8 %, respectively after exclusions. Patients with head and neck cancer (40 %), skin cancer (27 %), and prostate cancer (11 %) accounted for the majority of patients eligible for screening after exclusions. The sensitivity of the USPSTF, NCCN, and Tammemagi criteria in patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer (n = 26) was 38.5 % (CI95 20.2 %-59.4 %), 46.2 % (CI95 26.6 %-66.6 %), and 61.5 % (CI95 40.6 %-79.8 %), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully identified 9 % of an oncology population at consultation who could benefit from lung cancer screening in survivorship. Distribution of a written or electronic questionnaire at consultation is a simple, low cost, effective method of identifying patients who would benefit from LDCT.